SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(SC) 394

A.M.AHMADI, K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY
Mir Mohd. Omar – Appellant
Versus
State Of W. B. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J. :— The special leave is granted, and the appeal stands disposed of by this order.

2. The appellants-accused are facing trial for an offence under Ss. 302-34, I.P.C. and alternatively under Ss. 364-34, I.P.C. before the City Sessions Court, 13th Bench, Calcutta in Sessions Trial No. 1 of November, 1987 (Session Case No. 5/87). The prosecution examined in all 34 witnesses. The last witness examined is the investigating officer (PW 34). His examination went on for a number of days and came to an end on March 16, 1989. On the next day that is, on March 17, 1989, the court examined the accused under S. 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code and recorded their statements.

3. On March 21, 1989, the public prosecutor filed an application proposing some more questions to be put to the first appellant by way of re-examination under S. 313 of the Code. On the same day, the trial court by a considered order rejected that application. The relevant portion of that order runs as under:

"I think the Ld.P.P. can argue all these points as the time of advancing arguments in this case and the accused need not be re-examined on this point under S. 313, Cr. P.C. The Ld.P.P. ha
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top